Alex White (Labour)

My namesake, Senator Mary White, is correct when she says anybody could have seen that the construction boom could not be sustained, and that anybody could see the necessity to take other measures and plan for the future success of the Irish economy by promoting innovation. If she is correct, then her colleagues in Government are guilty of the most serious dereliction of duty to be possibly imagined. If it was evident to anybody in his or her right mind that the construction boom would not be sustained, why did the Taoiseach, Minister for Finance and Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, all of whom are presumably in their right minds, not see this, just as the rest of us did in recent years? Senator Mary White is correct in this respect and the Government has a case to answer.

Last week, when Senators briefly debated these issues on the Order of Business and several other occasions, a number of speakers promised that a set of visionary, forward looking announcements would be made this week in both Houses. This is not what transpired. Rather than a vision or plan, we have nothing more than a list of cuts which are euphemistically referred to as savings.

The Government believes it is necessary to take quick action to address what it perceives to be an immediate problem in the public finances. There is an air of unreality in the attempt by Senator MacSharry and other Government speakers to turn the debate around by asking what the Opposition would do in these circumstances. Is the Senator asking the Opposition to produce a list of cuts? Is that the level at which he wants to have a debate on the future of the economy? I will not play that game. Instead of producing a sterile list of cutbacks, we need the Government to show the vision we were promised. My party will not congratulate Ministers or the Government on sitting down with officials and devising a list of cuts when they failed to act quickly or with sufficient skill to prevent this state of affairs from arising in the first place. Congratulations and commendations are not called for in these circumstances. On the contrary, the most serious criticism must be levelled at the Government's door.

It has been repeatedly claimed that our current economic problems are internationally generated. The Minister of State, Deputy Mansergh, takes an interest in language and, I expect, in the precise meaning of words. Senators MacSharry and Hanafin may point to examples of economic difficulties in other countries but this is not evidence of cause and effect, as the most basic economics would demonstrate. One must examine the factual basis for what has occurred rather than making a spurious argument that economic difficulties being experienced in other countries are the cause of our difficulties.

Mr. Paul Tansey, an independent economic journalist, has not been taken to task by any other serious commentator for soberly and solemnly stating the following:

The recession has not been triggered by the global economic slowdown or even by the surge in world prices for energy and food. Its origins are closer to home. The recession is the result of a fall in domestic demand.

As Senator Buttimer pointed out, serious commentators, including the authors of the ESRI report, and anyone else who examines and analyses the facts before us, will clearly and fairly conclude that the economic problems we face are domestically generated, albeit against the background of difficulties on the world stage. It is not the case that these difficulties are causing our economic problems. For this reason, I repeat the call I made last week that speakers show care and precision. Senator Hanafin and others who use the Moody's report or other reports they manage to find using Google or some other means to suggest the economic problems we are experiencing are beyond our control and comparable to some sort of rain shower are trying to pull the wool over our eyes. We could control them.

Senator Mary White is correct. Over the years the Government has been party to knowingly and deliberately over-priming the construction sector as the repository of our economic prospects. It failed to address issues such as those raised by the Senator and instead set its store by construction. In development after development, whether large or small or in urban or rural areas, it massively over-incentivised the construction sector and failed to direct prudent investment into areas which would have yielded long-term results for the economy.

To paraphrase Senator Mary White again, anyone in his or her right mind could see that setting all of our store by the construction industry was not going to work. I criticise the former Minister for Finance, Mr. Charlie McCreevy, for introducing many incentives for construction. Are such incentives not in stark contrast with the collapse of public-private partnership projects to replace old housing stock in Dublin with State assistance? All over the country housing units are lying idle. Perhaps the Department has carried out a survey to determine how many housing units from the great boom are unoccupied. Is it not an extraordinary imbalance that thousands and perhaps tens of thousands of housing units are lying idle, perhaps as a result of some speculative adventure or due to uncertainty on the part of builders and developers about what they will do with them, while at the same time people are crying out for the provision of proper housing and accommodation in areas such as those which were supposed to be served by the collapsed public-private partnerships? The reality facing some people is in stark contrast to the position in which others find themselves.

The Government can have an impact on our current economic problems, which are in large measure home-grown. Government Senators have argued the Opposition should be involved in determining economic policy. I agree but its role should not be confined to engaging in a book-keeping exercise in which all sides produce lists of cuts. Senator Boyle argues the Opposition should be involved in developing a visionary approach on the type of economic activity which will be productive in the long term. If the Government seriously intends to involve and listen to Opposition parties, let us plan for the future in a real sense, rather than making rhetorical flourishes when things are going badly or shouting across the floor that the Opposition should give it a hand. That approach will not work.